The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on May 14, 2018, 11:02:16 pm
-
Trump to keynote prominent anti-abortion gala
by Kimberly Leonard
| May 14, 2018 03:19 PM
President Trump will keynote a prominent anti-abortion gala next week, the Susan B. Anthony List annual "Campaign for Life," according to the White House.
The event is scheduled for May 22 at the National Building Museum in Washington. Last year, Vice President Mike Pence and senior counselor Kellyanne Conway both spoke at the event.
Raj Shah, White House principal deputy press secretary, said Trump would "discuss the many actions he has taken to protect the lives of the unborn and defend religious liberty."
Conway is set to receive a distinguished leader award at the gala, and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., is also scheduled to give remarks.
more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/trump-to-keynote-prominent-anti-abortion-gala (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/trump-to-keynote-prominent-anti-abortion-gala)
-
They should get Elliott Broidy to do the introduction.
-
They should get Elliott Broidy to do the introduction.
*This* is your first reaction? Quite a worldview you've got there. :smokin:
-
*This* is your first reaction? Quite a worldview you've got there. :smokin:
No, my first reaction was to guffaw. This is the same guy who once said he's 'very much pro-choice' and signed an omnibus spending bill that included $500M for Planned Parenthood two months ago.
-
No, my first reaction was to guffaw. This is the same guy who once said he's 'very much pro-choice' and signed an omnibus spending bill that included $500M for Planned Parenthood two months ago.
So, I assume you had the same worldview [contemp] regarding every other (pro life) republican president that funded PP when they signed their own bloated spending bills?
-
So, I assume you had the same worldview [contemp] regarding every other (pro life) republican president that funded PP when they signed their own bloated spending bills?
Absolutely. Fiscally, there are few things that actually fall under the purview of the federal government. The items that have been subject to ‘compromise’ since the days of The New Deal have put us here:
http://www.usdebtclock.org (http://www.usdebtclock.org)
More to the point of the discussion, defunding PP was a huge priority of CWFA. They referred to Trump as the most pro-life ever.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/trump-the-most-pro-life-president-in-history (https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/trump-the-most-pro-life-president-in-history)
Then again, they also said this....
If Donald Trump’s position is to continue funding for Planned Parenthood of America, which receives more than $500 million from taxpayers annually, then he is out of step with pro-life voters.
https://concernedwomen.org/donald-trumps-pro-abortion-past-and-present/ (https://concernedwomen.org/donald-trumps-pro-abortion-past-and-present/)
Somebody needs to get their stories straight.
-
No, my first reaction was to guffaw. This is the same guy who once said he's 'very much pro-choice' and signed an omnibus spending bill that included $500M for Planned Parenthood two months ago.
@edpc Maybe you should stop looking up old quotes from Trump and concentrate on what he's actually doing.
I posted a review of a new Trump biography in editorial section. I think this guy really gets it about Trump.
-
This is an excerpt from Conrad Black's book. I think he 'gets' Trump.
"In Trump’s rise and fall and rise as a billionaire, Black never whitewashes his ruthlessness, his fast and loose relationship with the truth (e.g., “He is not so much a cynic as a methodological agnostic, not a liar as much as a disbeliever in absolute secular truthsâ€), and his occasionally tawdry P. T. Barnum hawking.
Trump’s friends and critics assure us that his incessant twittering and carnival rally-barking are suicidal. Black is too insightful to settle for such a one-dimensional critique (while often lamenting that Trump’s bluster and rhetorical excess are hurting full appreciation of his otherwise solid accomplishments). Instead, Black sees much of Trump’s targeting as comeuppance and long overdue—given a sanctimonious, corrupt media, and a gatekeeping political class that weakened the country over the last two decades of fiscal, social, cultural, and military irresponsibility.
-
@edpc Maybe you should stop looking up old quotes from Trump and concentrate on what he's actually doing.
I posted a review of a new Trump biography in editorial section. I think this guy really gets it about Trump.
Yeah - I think I mentioned what he did recently by signing the $500M to PP, which was really important to the pro-life group heaping scorn on his pro-choice last, changing their minds after the election, then getting slapped again by reality. Maybe you should read the links previously posted, instead of trotting out the Clintonesque ‘old news’ excuse when you hear something inconvenient.
-
Yeah - I think I mentioned what he did recently by signing the $500M to PP, which was really important to the pro-life group heaping scorn on his pro-choice last, changing their minds after the election, then getting slapped again by reality. Maybe you should read the links previously posted, instead of trotting out the Clintonesque ‘old news’ excuse when you hear something inconvenient.
@edpc I am not doing the 'old news' thing ... I am doing the 'understanding Trump' thing. If he is now at war for the pro-life movement, I appreciate it. It's the social issue I really care about.
-
@edpc I am not doing the 'old news' thing ...
Maybe you should stop looking up old quotes from Trump
Whatever you say.
-
Having someone fighting for my issues is OK with me, however irreverent and unconventional he is, his hands are on the right levers for the right reasons as far as I’m concerned.
-
Yeah - I think I mentioned what he did recently by signing the $500M to PP, which was really important to the pro-life group heaping scorn on his pro-choice last, changing their minds after the election, then getting slapped again by reality. Maybe you should read the links previously posted, instead of trotting out the Clintonesque ‘old news’ excuse when you hear something inconvenient.
So, answer this simple question, if Ted Cruz voted for the February budget that funded planned parenthood as well, do you now consider him pro-abortion? If you can't answer that with a simple yes or no, then, your argument is very questionable and of course, no one would consider TC to be pro-abortion. No one but the fringe.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/budget-deal-gop-and-trump-fully-fund-planned-parenthood (https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/budget-deal-gop-and-trump-fully-fund-planned-parenthood)
Ryan and the House defunded planned parenthood in February, the Senate though, did not do that.
-
Having someone fighting for my issues is OK with me, however irreverent and unconventional he is, his hands are on the right levers for the right reasons as far as I’m concerned.
The unending mewlings of NTs notwithstanding, I agree.
-
Those who bring up that argument would have the whole government shut down over Planned Parenthood,
Every president since Clinton has funded PP, so at the most, Trump is doing no different and those against Trump, actually have a pretty intelllectually disingenuous argument, since Trump did all to try to defund PP, the Senate could not get it done, so what would shutting the government down have accomplished.
No reasonable Pro-Life authority, takes up this "500m argument" seriously. I say, their argument is basically dishonest. You won't find critics at lifenews.com, lifesitenews.com, just opponents of the Prez use this weak argument.
-
Concerned Women of America have come out and lauded Trump for what he has done in office on issues such as the pro-life issue,
https://concernedwomen.org/donald-trumps-pro-abortion-past-and-present/
The above cited article is from 2015
-
Anyone want to see what is on the opening page of CWA, Concerned Women of America?
https://concernedwomen.org/
Also, I know in the past year, they have lauded Trump on his pro-life acts, do we really need to hunt all of this down?
-
November 2017!
“I am so thankful that President Trump kicked off his presidency with the nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch,†Penny Nance, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA) tells Breitbart News. “CWA was honored to support him and rally for his victory. Gorsuch was a game changer and set the tone and criteria for future administration nominees in both the judicial branch and the executive branch.â€
“I’m grateful for his re-shaping of the federal judiciary, a process well underway, and whose fruits will long outlast his Presidency,†Pavone adds as well.
Nance also notes that Trump’s other new additions to the federal courts inspire further hope.
“Loyal constitutionalists continue to be nominated to circuit courts by our president — five more just last week — and I am hopeful and confident that this trend will continue into the new year,†she says.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/23/five-reasons-pro-life-leaders-are-thankful-donald-trump-is-president/ (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/23/five-reasons-pro-life-leaders-are-thankful-donald-trump-is-president/)
-
Or we could look at the absolute duplicity of these fraud broads, singling out Congress and giving Trump a pass. He did not have to sign the omnibus to get the $700B for the military. That money had already been allocated and signed under another congressional authorization in December 2017. The omnibus combined multiple spending bills into one. Vetoing the omnibus would not have negated the previously authorized and signed military spending. Trump did not veto the bill, because he knew it had a high chance of being overridden, which would have politically embarrassed him. You were sold out for pride, plain and simple.
The idea no one read it is an absolute lie. It was debated and negotiated for MONTHS, with the administration legislative team as part of it. It did not materialize overnight. The admin knew exactly what would be added at various points of the discussions, since they were party to them. Here is the CYA - I mean CWA - pathetic attempt to save face and hope people were ignorant (and most are) of what I have written above.
Taking Aim at the Elephant in the Room: Why Republicans Should be Nervous
https://concernedwomen.org/author/pnance/
-
So, answer this simple question, if Ted Cruz voted for the February budget that funded planned parenthood as well, do you now consider him pro-abortion? If you can't answer that with a simple yes or no, then, your argument is very questionable and of course, no one would consider TC to be pro-abortion. No one but the fringe.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/budget-deal-gop-and-trump-fully-fund-planned-parenthood (https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/budget-deal-gop-and-trump-fully-fund-planned-parenthood)
Ryan and the House defunded planned parenthood in February, the Senate though, did not do that.
I'd consider him a sellout on that issue and also on the point of fiscal responsibility - something else he's always championed.
-
Maybe you should stop looking up old quotes from Trump
Whatever you say.
@edpc No need to be dismissive. My point is that Trump was probably indifferent on the abortion thing in the past. I doubt if he ever thought about it, or maybe he was just naive and thought Planned Parenthood helped women.
But he has great influence now and if he has turned that influence toward getting rid of the pro-abortion forces and planned parenthood, that is a good thing.
-
The unending mewlings of NTs notwithstanding, I agree.
I agree. If Trump can move the sentiment in the country towards banning abortion, I'm not gonna whine about various stuff he's done in the past I didn't like. What is the point?
-
@edpc No need to be dismissive. My point is that Trump was probably indifferent on the abortion thing in the past. I doubt if he ever thought about it, or maybe he was just naive and thought Planned Parenthood helped women.
But he has great influence now and if he has turned that influence toward getting rid of the pro-abortion forces and planned parenthood, that is a good thing.
If he really means it, which I find doubtful. Here's a guy who has spent the majority of his life in NYC, with similar values. Sorry, but I don't buy into the notion someone with so many opposing political views and multiple affiliations since 2000 had a great awakening in 2015 when he decided to run. He's never had any real connection to Middle America politically or culturally until he decided to run. As far as I'm concerned, he's Sealtest, trying to pass himself off as Blue Bell.
-
I'd consider him a sellout on that issue and also on the point of fiscal responsibility - something else he's always championed.
Truth. Time to hold all politicians responsible for their actions regardless of who they are. A name is a name. What matters is their actions.
-
No, my first reaction was to guffaw. This is the same guy who once said he's 'very much pro-choice' and signed an omnibus spending bill that included $500M for Planned Parenthood two months ago.
Funny. My Constitution doesn't say anything about bills originating from the Executive Branch. Mine says they come from the Legislative Branch. Seems to me Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul are responsible for funding abortions.
-
I'd consider him a sellout on that issue and also on the point of fiscal responsibility - something else he's always championed.
Yep. Me too. Cruz is no longer leading Conservatism. It would take a whole lot to make up for what he has doe recently against where he has always been.
-
Funny. My Constitution doesn't say anything about bills originating from the Executive Branch. Mine says they come from the Legislative Branch. Seems to me Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul are responsible for funding abortions.
My reading of the senate vote count shows all three voting against the omnibus bill. My copy of the constitution says the president can veto a bill directly or indirectly by not signing it. If he does the latter, it's still law after 10 days, unless congress is adjourned. This president chose neither option and offered feeble reasoning for signing it, as previously mentioned.
It has no text concerning the line item veto the president grandstanded on at the signing. It does tell me congress can pass legislation and the judicial branch can interpret constitutionality. My history books show just such a bill was passed in 1996, then struck down as unconstitutional in 1998 by a 6-3 decision. Very funny, indeed.
-
Fantastic to see President Trump defending the moral argument for anything. Funny as hell.
-
Fantastic to see President Trump defending the moral argument for anything. Funny as hell.
With this post you bring me back to the evening of July 21, 2016 --- and doing this (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/6/6d/Snoopy_happy_dance.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20060526155438)
Fabulous way to start the morning. Thanks!
-
I'd consider him a sellout on that issue and also on the point of fiscal responsibility - something else he's always championed.
So one's constituency is racked, suffers the effect of a devasting hurricane, people die but you call him a sellout? Wow, just wow.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today issued the following statement regarding the Senate’s budget agreement:
“After much consideration, I will reluctantly vote for this legislation. This bill contains major victories; if hurricane relief and restoring vital defense spending were the only elements of this bill, I would be supporting it energetically and enthusiastically. Unfortunately—in addition to funding those critical priorities—this bill also unnecessarily balloons the deficit.
“Since Hurricane Harvey’s landfall in August, I have worked tirelessly with Senator Cornyn, Governor Abbott, the Texas congressional delegation, and dozens of local mayors, county judges, and police and fire chiefs up and down the coast to identify and meet the needs of impacted Texans, who in many cases lost everything. Today, we follow through on our promise to give Texans the next significant package of emergency assistance we need to recover and come back stronger than ever.
“Prior to today, we had already secured more than $50 billion in emergency funding for storm victims in 2017, as well as passing the Cruz-Cornyn-Rubio legislation that provided more than $5.5 billion in targeted tax relief to those who suffered from the devastation of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. The additional funding provided by today’s legislation is an important next step in our state’s road to recovery, and I am grateful that we have been able to build upon and improve the bill that was sent to us by the House of Representatives so that we can continue to give the State of Texas the resources it desperately needs.
“Specifically, I’m proud that Senator Cornyn and I were able to work with our colleagues to increase overall disaster relief from $81 billion to $89 billion; to significantly increase Texas’s share of that relief; to provide vital relief to cotton farmers devastated by Harvey; and to significantly increase the funding for critical Army Corps flood management projects that will help the State mitigate against future flooding events, such as potentially beginning construction on the Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay coastal barrier or building a third reservoir in the Houston area.
http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-explains-why-he-voted-for-new-budget-bill-when-other-conservatives-balked-at-it/ (http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-explains-why-he-voted-for-new-budget-bill-when-other-conservatives-balked-at-it/)
I guess, a lot of this goes to those line item vetoes.
-
Fantastic to see President Trump defending the moral argument for anything. Funny as hell.
You take the cause of life lightly? Most people are thankful for whatever they get. Respectfully, I wonder if you are just pushing for democrat or liberal values in your posts and you are just being ironic. It seems your post more than others, use the term "rats" often.
As far as I'm concerned, Trump is the most moral leader we have had in a long time.
We aren't involved in any number of conflicts that we get involved in, in a reckless manner, he has taken measures to bestow religious liberties to the populace along with pro-life measures. Yes, states can defund Planned Parenthood without a court striking it down.
-
Rand Paul gets limited things done, that is so... but he usually, if not always votes against these things. At the same time, Kentucky is rarely submerged under water.
-
Even with the hoopla about the Omnibus bill, don't they say per the discretion of the White House/Executive branch, that they can still hold up funding to Planned Parenthood, I don't fully expect it to happen but it does seem possible since it was not an actual budget bill. I believe, the Title X protests lately, have been about this.
https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=36898 (https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=36898)
If HHS denies Title X funds to Planned Parenthood, this would be another pro-life victory the haters can ignore.
-
So one's constituency is racked, suffers the effect of a devasting hurricane, people die but you call him a sellout? Wow, just wow.
http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-explains-why-he-voted-for-new-budget-bill-when-other-conservatives-balked-at-it/ (http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-explains-why-he-voted-for-new-budget-bill-when-other-conservatives-balked-at-it/)
I guess, a lot of this goes to those line item vetoes.
People died in Sandy. Didn't make Christie any less of a sellout for cozying up to Obama. Federal money has to come from somewhere. You either tax, borrow, or print. In any case, the bill always comes due. Are you going to continue with whataboutism on unrelated subjects or address what I said about your concerned hypocrites? They were rightfully concerned with Trump's past record, full body hugged the tarbaby, anyway, and can now dwell in the mire.
-
Those who bring up that argument would have the whole government shut down over Planned Parenthood,
Every president since Clinton has funded PP, so at the most, Trump is doing no different and those against Trump, actually have a pretty intelllectually disingenuous argument, since Trump did all to try to defund PP, the Senate could not get it done, so what would shutting the government down have accomplished.
No reasonable Pro-Life authority, takes up this "500m argument" seriously. I say, their argument is basically dishonest. You won't find critics at lifenews.com, lifesitenews.com, just opponents of the Prez use this weak argument.
The President said he wasn't going to sign it and then he did. There was a lot in there besides Planned Parenthood. Then he tries to cover himself by saying never again.
Baloney, that's the way he rolls.
-
As usual, this thread has gotten off topic.
It is about President Trump promoting pro-life values. That is important to me and should be to all of us.
Dragging up everything he's annoyed you with in the past is counter-productive.
-
As usual, this thread has gotten off topic.
It is about President Trump promoting pro-life values. That is important to me and should be to all of us.
Dragging up everything he's annoyed you with in the past is counter-productive.
Was it yoga, meditation or maybe chamomile that’s put you so mello lately? LOL ^-^
-
Was it yoga, meditation or maybe chamomile that’s put you so mello lately? LOL ^-^
Beer and vodka, baby.
-
LOL! Maybe I’ll try that – in moderation, of course. LOL
-
With this post you bring me back to the evening of July 21, 2016 --- and doing this (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/6/6d/Snoopy_happy_dance.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20060526155438)
So will lithium. Dance on.
-
You take the cause of life lightly? Most people are thankful for whatever they get. Respectfully, I wonder if you are just pushing for democrat or liberal values in your posts and you are just being ironic. It seems your post more than others, use the term "rats" often.
As far as I'm concerned, Trump is the most moral leader we have had in a long time.
Your moral indignation is adorable.
Believe what you want. President Trump embodies biblical philosophies like "God helps those who help themselves"- two Corinthians:69 and an eye for an eye Mutha-F*qah! He may have paid to forced a camel through the eye of a needle, but I will not testify to his messianic suffering at the hands of media bias. And I will not give credit for speech. Cause i heard these speeches from previous establishment republicans.
But you be blessed you...righteous warrior for the entitled.
-
You take the cause of life lightly? Most people are thankful for whatever they get. Respectfully, I wonder if you are just pushing for democrat or liberal values in your posts and you are just being ironic. It seems your post more than others, use the term "rats" often.
As far as I'm concerned, Trump is the most moral leader we have had in a long time.
We aren't involved in any number of conflicts that we get involved in, in a reckless manner, he has taken measures to bestow religious liberties to the populace along with pro-life measures. Yes, states can defund Planned Parenthood without a court striking it down.
Exactly, @TomSea Well, not exactly but you make a good point.
No matter what Trump did or said in the past about abortion, if he has realized now that it is a sin and weakens the moral fiber of America, that is nothing but good.
Trump has a lot of influence and when he backs something with enthusiasm, it has an effect.
I have a hard time understanding why people would choose this great moment with Trump to go back and pick at old grievances.
-
Exactly, @TomSea Well, not exactly but you make a good point.
No matter what Trump did or said in the past about abortion, if he has realized now that it is a sin and weakens the moral fiber of America, that is nothing but good.
Trump has a lot of influence and when he backs something with enthusiasm, it has an effect.
I have a hard time understanding why people would choose this great moment with Trump to go back and pick at old grievances.
Larry Elder had a similar argument yesterday,
Okay, we might have been for Trump on election day, not all of us but some. Through the primary campaigns, maybe we weren't.
Who was on the ballot? Hillary and Trump. Those were basically the 2 selections we had.
Some will rebel against the choices, that's fine too.
@Emjay
-
Your moral indignation is adorable.
Believe what you want. President Trump embodies biblical philosophies like "God helps those who help themselves"- two Corinthians:69 and an eye for an eye Mutha-F*qah! He may have paid to forced a camel through the eye of a needle, but I will not testify to his messianic suffering at the hands of media bias. And I will not give credit for speech. Cause i heard these speeches from previous establishment republicans.
But you be blessed you...righteous warrior for the entitled.
Excuse me, but there were only 2 candidates on the ballot with a real chance to win the election, Hillary and Donald Trump. One can look at them and say, both are flawed or one might look at it and say, well, my beliefs line up more with the GOP candidate and the GOP platform, it is that simple.
Who was the first candidate I was for for the 2016 primaries? He failed early on, it was Scott Walker. You can only vote for what is on the ballot.
@Once-Ler
-
Excuse me, but there were only 2 candidates on the ballot with a real chance to win the election, Hillary and Donald Trump. One can look at them and say, both are flawed or one might look at it and say, well, my beliefs line up more with the GOP candidate and the GOP platform, it is that simple. @Once-Ler
@TomSea you are excused.
I agree both candidates in 2016 were flawed. I do not agree "Trump is the most moral leader we have had in a long time."
It's that simple.
-
Having someone fighting for my issues is OK with me, however irreverent and unconventional he is, his hands are on the right levers for the right reasons as far as I’m concerned.
:beer: Yep.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ddc_-e8U0AU8Aoc.jpg)
-
Trump to Cut Planned Parenthood Funding, Administration Will Announce Friday
https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/trump-to-cut-planned-parenthood-funding-administration-will-announce-friday (https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/trump-to-cut-planned-parenthood-funding-administration-will-announce-friday)
On Friday, the Trump administration will announce a proposed rule to cut taxpayer funding to abortionists like Planned Parenthood under Title X, a program that provides $260 million annually in federal funding for contraception and other “family planning†initiatives.
“The proposal would require a bright line of physical as well as financial separation between Title X programs and any program (or facility) where abortion is performed, supported, or referred for as a method of family planning,†a Trump administration official tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD in an email.
-
No, my first reaction was to guffaw. This is the same guy who once said he's 'very much pro-choice' and signed an omnibus spending bill that included $500M for Planned Parenthood two months ago.
Sure, in a perfect world, defund PP. But not at the cost of shutting down the government. Not at the cost of funding for military readiness.
Every woman has the power to decide for herself to give birth and raise a child. If you want to help her decide, go right ahead. But this whole debate about abortion is getting tiresome, at least from the standpoint of the government's role. The government has no role. It is the woman's decision.
-
Sure, in a perfect world, defund PP. But not at the cost of shutting down the government. Not at the cost of funding for military readiness.
The $700B was already authorized and signed under the National Defense Authorization Act on Dec. 12, 2017. Tying the crap in the omnibus to it has been an admin lie.
Besides, if he's so dead set against some of the provisions, he doesn't have to sign it. It'll still become law after 10 days and Congress owns it. You learn that in 8th grade social studies.
-
Larry Elder had a similar argument yesterday,
Okay, we might have been for Trump on election day, not all of us but some. Through the primary campaigns, maybe we weren't.
Who was on the ballot? Hillary and Trump. Those were basically the 2 selections we had.
Some will rebel against the choices, that's fine too.
@Emjay
This is a question that infuriates anti-Trumpers. They think there were three selections on the ballot: Hillary, Trump and 'Their Soul.'
-
This is a question that infuriates anti-Trumpers. They think there were three selections on the ballot: Hillary, Trump and 'Their Soul.'
Ow! So funny! @Emjay
In my case, I took care of that: after voting for Trump, I went to confession. But, I think the priest may have voted for Trump too, because after I was done confessing my sin, instead of penance, he stepped out of the confessional and gave me a high five!
-
Ow! So funny! @Emjay
In my case, I took care of that: after voting for Trump, I went to confession. But, I think the priest may have voted for Trump too, because after I was done confessing instead of penance he stepped out of the confessional and gave me a high five!
What is funny is Trumpers giving morality, and principles a rim-job. Come back to me when my tax dollars don't pay for murder...the rest is just the same old song and dance...only this time from a populist liar instead of a conservative liar. I quit the GOP...you have no freaking clothes. You're just making money for lawyers.
-
What is funny is Trumpers giving morality, and principles a rim-job. Come back to me when my tax dollars don't pay for murder...the rest is just the same old song and dance...only this time from a populist liar instead of a conservative liar. I quit the GOP...you have no freaking clothes. You're just making money for lawyers.
You’re (almost) exactly right, Once. But, since morality and principles are devalued currencies in DC, where power gets things done, I’m putting my money on the guy who’s shown me he can move my issues [pro life, deregulation, national security, lower taxes, border security, religious liberty] in the right direction. I can live with that. Cheer up. Trump is making a big difference, for Once.
-
Ow! So funny! @Emjay
In my case, I took care of that: after voting for Trump, I went to confession. But, I think the priest may have voted for Trump too, because after I was done confessing my sin, instead of penance, he stepped out of the confessional and gave me a high five!
@aligncare :silly:
-
What is funny is Trumpers giving morality, and principles a rim-job. Come back to me when my tax dollars don't pay for murder...the rest is just the same old song and dance...only this time from a populist liar instead of a conservative liar. I quit the GOP...you have no freaking clothes. You're just making money for lawyers.
@Once-Ler This whole thread is about Trump speaking at, and presumably supporting, a pro-life movement. Try to relax and see what happens.